Combinatorial Game Theory
who wins, and by how much
Concept

Antichain — where it appears

A set of values no two of which can be compared, whose size measures how far the order on values is from a line. The survivors of the reduction always form one, and how wide it is decides how many options a canonical form needs.

Named by 7 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

How old a form is, and how old its value is. Every one of the 256 forms born by day two, placed by the depth it is written at and by the birthday of the value it carries. Nothing sits above the diagonal, because a form cannot be younger than the value in it; the diagonal holds the forms written at exactly their value's birthday, and everything below it is a position written older than it needs to be. The count in each cell was obtained by canonicalising all 256 forms and measuring both depths.

How old a value is

A form's depth bounds the birthday of the value inside it, and reducing to canonical form attains the bound — for all 22 values born by day two, with no exception. Twenty-four of the 256 forms are older than what they are worth. The same reduction that makes the bound tight is what puts day three within reach: 98 option sets a side instead of four million, 9,604 forms, 1,474 values, a quarter of a second.

values · Numbers How often one value is above another. The partial order counted on two successive days. The proportion of pairs that can be compared at all falls sharply, and so does the proportion of values that can be compared with zero — which is the proportion of positions whose winner does not depend on who moves.

How rare it is to be bigger

Values are partially ordered, and 'partially' does most of the work. On day two, 179 of 231 pairs can be compared and 13 of the 22 values can be compared with zero. One day later the shares are 60% and 29%, and the largest set of mutually incomparable values found rises from four to at least twenty-three. Comparison is the exception; confusion is what values normally do to one another.

sums · Comparison What deleting is worth on its own. The reduction split into its two halves and each measured. Deleting a dominated option removes exactly one option and can do nothing else; bypassing a reversible one substitutes an option list and can widen the form. The counts say how much of the reduction the monotone half accounts for.

The reduction that always shrinks

Canonical form is two reductions and they are not the same kind of operation. Deleting a dominated option removes one option and can do nothing else; bypassing a reversible one substitutes a whole option list. Over the 256 forms born by day two, deleting alone finishes 225 of them and accounts for 480 of the 520 options that come off — and the 31 it cannot finish are almost all the ones with a star in them.

values · Dominance One option list, as the order it is. The four options above, with an arrow from each option to every option it is at least as good as. Deleting keeps the one nothing points at and removes the rest, so the reduction takes three of them — a number read off the shape and not off the values.

How much a list of options can lose

Deleting a dominated option is the reduction with no surprises, and how many options it takes is decided by the shape of the order rather than by the values in it: the survivors are the maximal elements, and the count is the length of the list less the number of them. The essay separating the two reductions closed by predicting that the longest chain would give the number. It is a lower bound, exact on 3,859 of the 7,315 four-option lists and wrong on the rest.

values · Dominance The identity that would join the order to the addition. Every pair of the twenty-two values born by day two, asked whether the join plus the meet equals the sum. It holds on all 201 comparable pairs, where the join is the larger and the meet the smaller and it cannot do otherwise, and on none of the 52 incomparable ones.

Where the order and the sum disagree

Day two is a lattice, and day two is a group, and it is not a lattice-ordered group. The one identity that would join the two structures — the join plus the meet equals the pair — holds on exactly the 201 pairs where it cannot fail and on none of the other 52, and the errors split thirteen high, thirteen low and twenty-six confused.

values · Lattice Which description of a surviving option is right. The two candidate readings of what the reduction keeps, scored over every Domineering option list on six boards. Taking the most room is right on under half the lists, which is what a description with no content scores on lists this short. Leaving the opponent fewest replies is right on nine in ten.

Which option the reduction keeps

Domination deletes an option when another is at least as good, so what survives is the top of an order. On a board that order is made of moves, and two descriptions of the surviving move suggest themselves. Over 1,586 Domineering option lists one of them is right 47% of the time and the other 90%, and the one that wins is not the one a player would guess.

values · Dominance Star's fibre, described. The fourteen antichains whose mirror value is star, with the two conditions that pick them out of the ninety-six.

A mex with no impartial game in it

The rung below described the zero fibre of the mirror map and left star's fourteen undescribed. Star's fibre is 'some element is at least nought, and none is at least star' — and the two rules are one rule: the mirror value is the least nimber no element of the set reaches. That is a mex, in a construction built entirely from partizan values.

sums · Negation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Partial orderCanonical formComparisonStar (∗)Dominated optionEnumerationBorn on dayCounterexampleDay twoExhaustive searchReductionConfused

All concepts